The series continues... Lesson 5 of 12
This is the first of 3 lessons (5, 6, 7) of the Dramatic Actions of Jesus
To watch the video: https://youtu.be/nXKxeA3HhMs
Deeper Truths: A study with lessons from Kenneth Bailey’s book,
Jesus through Middle Eastern Eyes
A 12-week study: This on 26 March 2026
Lesson 5: The Dramatic Actions of Jesus
Given on Zoom
Led by Bob Mendelsohn
Preliminaries
Shalom to my friends on this Zoom call. Tonight we will begin discussion of the topics that Kenneth Bailey introduced in Part 4 of his Six-part book. This week we look in on The Dramatic Actions of Jesus.
To remind ourselves of the context of this part, the book is made up of six parts, in order: (1) the birth of Jesus, (2) the Beatitudes, (3) the Lord’s Prayer, (4) the dramatic actions of Jesus, (5) Jesus and women, and (6) the parables of Jesus.
What Might the Phrase Mean?
“The Dramatic Actions of Jesus” to me indicates moments where Jesus teaches through bold, symbolic actions the following:
1) Reveals who He is (Messiah, Servant, Judge)
2) Confronts hypocrisy and empty religion
3) Visually communicates spiritual truth
4) Often echoes Old Testament prophetic symbolism
Bailey and the Dramatic Actions of Jesus
Kenneth Bailey highlights three episodes to showcase what he calls “The Dramatic Actions of Jesus.” Those are 1) The call of Peter to be the apostle, 2) The inauguration of the public ministry of Jesus and 3) The stories of the Blind man and Zaccheus in Jericho. I found these delightful and significant moments in the ministry of our Saviour, to be sure. They are all from the Gospel of Luke. I wonder, if Bailey and I had a discussion with his editor and publisher, if we couldn’t have come up with a better title to this 4th part of this book. You see, I find some other sections of the Gospel to more reflect the title of “Dramatic Actions.” Tonight I will address one of his, and one of mine.
A Simple Way to Think About It
If his parables are spoken stories, then his dramatic actions are lived stories. I love story, and I think I’m like most people. Hollywood certainly knows how to play on the desires of most people in this regard. Take a story, any story, build in intrigue, suspense, conflict, right vs wrong morality, power grabs, love interests, and you have the makings of a Shakespeare play, a Hollywood movie, a television soap opera. And just so you don’t think this is so current, the Bible is filled with these stories from Adam and Eve to Cain and Abel, to the drama of the Akedah, the Exodus, Ruth and Boaz, Saul, Samuel, David and Solomon… and so much more, all the way to the final chapter of the Bible as history and story is summed up in the eschaton.
Tonight I’m going to highlight four of my own examples which better reflect my definitions, but don’t worry we will get to Bailey’s also. Lord willing.
1) The Triumphal Entry
Jesus enters Jerusalem riding a donkey (Matthew 21),
A) Jesus publicly reveals who he is, i.e. the Messiah.
B) Reframes kingship as humility, not military power, visually explains a spiritual truth
C) Forces people to respond—accept or reject him. He is confronting hypocrisy.
D) Since it hearkens to Zechariah 9.9, it echoes the prophecy, now in fulfilment
It’s a staged, prophetic moment.
2) The Last Supper
At the final fellowship meal before his death, Jesus gives Passover new meaning.
A) Establishes the new covenant. Reveals he is the Lamb of God and Saviour of the world.
B) Points to his coming sacrifice. Foot-washing explains a spiritual truth.
C) Contrasts with Judas who is self-serving, hypocrisy vs wholeheartedness
D) Turns a Passover echo into a lasting spiritual practice
This is a symbolic act that shapes worship to this day.
3) Cursing the Fig Tree
In Mark 11, Jesus curses a fig tree that has leaves but no fruit.
A) He is the Judge of all the earth, even Creation which he made
B) Represents outward religion with no real fruit; hypocrisy is a failed system
C) A warning to Israel’s leadership. Spiritual truth embodied in a tree
D) Echoes the vineyard of Isaiah 5. Israel is under obligation
This is a powerful visual lesson on judgment and authenticity It’s teaching through action, not just words.
4) Cleansing of the Temple
One of the clearest examples is when Jesus overturned the tables in the Temple (Matthew 21.13, Mark 11:17, and Luke 19:46, John 2).
A) This is a direct challenge to hypocrisy and corruption in worship and prevention!
B) A prophetic sign of judgment and that he is the judge
C) A declaration that God’s house had lost its purpose
D) Literal echo of Isaiah 56.7 as Yeshua said it!
This wasn’t just anger—it was symbolic confrontation.
Let me unpack that last one a bit more. What is the hypocrisy? It’s clear that Yeshua is emphasizing something is wrong, but don’t you get this wrong. For example, I’ve been in churches and spoken from the pulpit, found wonderful saints who really want to learn more from me and our organization, but when they ask if I have any books or such, and I say, “of course”, at that moment I’ve experienced prevention by an elder or deacon saying, “We don’t sell products either “on the Lord’s Day” or “in God’s house.” And they site this passage, and this scene.
Of course, I respect their house and their policies, but when they come up with clever almost lawyer-like mechanics to allow their people to buy things on the holy day or without cash, by using a credit card machine or such, I smile internally, seeing what made Yeshua upset. When people misread Messiah, and his declarations and his intentions, he is at least disappointed. But if it’s someone who should know better, his judgment becomes apparently violent, by flipping over tables.
Friends, the key in this passage, and Yeshua announces it clearly, the house should be ‘for all nations.’ To avoid misunderstanding, we must remember the construction and categories of persons in the Temple area in Jerusalem. Perhaps most of you remember the layout of the Tabernacle as there is much more about that in the Bible than the Temple itself. But the basics are in both.
There was an outer court where ordinary Jewish men from any of the 12 tribes could bring sacrifices or offerings and present them to the Levites or priests. They in turn would officiate in the actions required. The altar of sacrifice and subsequent butchering actions, the laver to wash the priest’s hands and feet (Exodus 30:17-21), all out in the outer court.
Behind a veil was the inner court, with the first room being the Holy Place (From the Latin, we get the word ‘sanctuary’) Into the sanctuary only priests could enter, and work on the menorah, the table of showbread and the altar of incense. And remember the incense altar was in the sanctuary 359 days a year. On Yom Kippur, the priest would move that altar into the Holy of Holies, the innermost chamber of the Tabernacle.
There was a veil that divided the sanctuary from the Holiest of All, the Holy of Holies into which only the High Priest would enter and at that only once a year. That veil was 4” thick and very tall, and very heavy. The one in the Temple was 60 feet tall. Imagine the weight of it. That’s the one that was torn from top to bottom (Matt. 27.51, Mark 15.38) at the Crucifixion.
Now by the time of the Temple, the Tabernacle’s simple designs had given way to the elaborate. Both under Solomon and then in the rebuild, and certainly under Herod to whom most historians attribute the name brand of the 2nd Temple. Both served the same religious function as the central place for sacrifices and the Ark of the Covenant. But there are some key differences.
1) Portability vs. Permanence: The Tabernacle (Mishkan) was built by Moses from wood, skins, and fabrics, designed to be assembled and disassembled. The Temple was built of stone and, later, wood covered in gold. Permanent? It’s been gone since 70 CE.
2) Size and Structure: Solomon’s Temple was double the size of the Tabernacle, measuring roughly 60x20 cubits compared to the 30x10 cubits of the inner sanctum. The Temple added a massive entrance porch, storage chambers, and massive courtyard.
3) Worship Elements: The Temple featured ten menorahs and ten tables for bread, compared to only one of each in the Tabernacle. The laver was replaced with a massive "Sea of cast metal" to accommodate more priests.
4) Symbolism: The Tabernacle was an intimate "cozy neighbourhood" presence of God, while the Temple was an impressive monument of a prosperous nation.
In the Temple there were more elaborate rooms and areas for the divides that the Jewish religion maintained in those days. And these divides will be immediately recognizable to you as Bible students. There was a place firstly for women, since they were disallowed from being in the presence of the men in worship sections. You know that at the Wall in Jerusalem to this day. Have you been to the synagogue Magen Avot on Waterloo Street, or visited one in Prague or New York City or even in Nashville? Most historic synagogues carry on the tradition of separating men from women sometimes by different floors or behind curtains or walls.
What about a second category, slaves? It seems there was no specific, designated area or sanctuary within the Temple complex for slaves to go. While Jewish law required non-Jewish slaves to be offered conversion, the Temple structure itself did not have a "sanctuary" or special refuge area for them, unlike the cities of refuge for those fleeing unintentional killing.
Of note, mentioned in Acts 6.9, the "Synagogue of the Freedmen" (Libertini) indicates a place of worship in Jerusalem for freed slaves (Jews taken into slavery by Romans in 63 BC), but this was a separate building, not part of the Temple itself.
The Temple, particularly Herod’s Temple, was designed with strict restrictions on entry, including the Women's Courtyard, Court of Israel, and Court of Priests.
OK, a place for women, and some hint of a place for slaves. What about a 3rd category, namely non-Jews? Yes, Herod’s Temple had the Court of the Gentiles. As the outermost courtyard, it was the only part of the sacred complex they could access, serving as a place for prayer, reflection, and teaching for those visiting.
This area was the largest court, accommodating non-Jews and those considered impure. Gentiles were forbidden from going further into the inner courts. Signs in Greek and Latin warned that anyone passing the boundary faced the death penalty.
Now think about this Bible verse.
“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3.28)
Of course, we know that there is still Jew and Greek, and still male and female even though some are suffering from gender dysphoria. There is still a slave and a free class. What the Apostle Paul is saying to the Galatians is that no one is better, no one is less. Each of us has access to the Father of Life, and can be called children of God. We are his and he is ours. Hallelujah!
Back to the cleansing, mentioned in each of the four Gospels. The verse emphasizes that God’s presence is accessible to everyone, regardless of background.
The whole Temple is the space which is dedicated to prayer, to learning, and deep connection with God, not just a physical building or a place for financial gain ("den of thieves").
The Court of the Gentiles, the only space non-Jews could attend and listen, to learn, and to pray and to encounter the Living God, was at this time being used for merchandising. What? Yeshua wanted to help Gentiles hear the Gospel, but they were being prevented by the salespeople who were given the space, probably rented the space especially during major festivals and the lead up to them.
The phrase underscores the priority of fostering for everyone a direct relationship with God over worldly activities within holy spaces. Merchandising is not wrong, even at the Temple, but prevention of the story of God being offered to any person or people—that’s just wrong, and will attract the aggravation and judgment of Messiah.
Oh, and as a bonus, don’t miss this, “My house shall be…” Yeshua is identifying that house as his house. He is claiming deity, again.
That’s my 4th example of Dramatic Actions of Jesus.
Let’s take the third of Bailey’s examples. Next week we will unpack my other three examples and perhaps his other two.
The Blind Man and Zaccheus
Not being sighted in Bible days was considered a curse. And the person was unable to contribute to society, a serious drain on the economy, and a dismissed overlooked person. Gandhi called them among “the untouchables.”
Returning to my definition of ‘dramatic actions.’ When people talk about “The Dramatic Actions of Jesus,” they’re referring to moments in the Gospels where Jesus didn’t just teach with words—He used striking, symbolic, sometimes shocking actions to communicate deeper spiritual truths.
These weren’t random miracles or emotional reactions. They were intentional, prophetic acts—almost like living parables.
Luke records these two stories back-to-back. Bailey well recognizes that the chapter divisions were not Lucan, and as such he links these two stories properly. Both take place in Jericho, and interestingly to me, he finds two stories that involve only men. I’ve been impressed with his view that often Yeshua will tell stories involving a woman and then a man to highlight that everyone can be part of God’s Kingdom. Bailey got my attention with that throughout his book, and I’m sure you will have noted that as well.
But these two stories involve males only. But thankfully, not only for males.
There are so many contrasts in these two stories, but as Bailey and others have clearly stated, Yeshua juxtaposes them for our takeaways. Let’s get deep into the weeds.
Simple Recap of the stories: Summary
- One cries out → Jesus stops
- One climbs up → Jesus calls him to come down
- Both are saved
The Key Statement (Luke 19:10)
Zaccheus’ story ends with “The Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.” In Luke 18 and 19, Jesus shows that whether you are crying in desperation or hiding in curiosity—He sees you, calls you, and saves you.”
That statement explains both stories:
- Jesus responds to the one crying out (blind man)
- Jesus seeks out the one hiding in a tree (Zaccheus)
Salvation Leads to Action
- Blind man → follows and praises God
- Zaccheus → repents and makes significant restitution
Real encounters with Jesus always produce visible change
The Crowd as a Barrier
- In both stories, the crowd gets in the way
- Silencing the blind man
- Blocking Zaccheus
Religion and society can hinder access to Jesus, not just help it
Sight as a Theme
- The blind man cannot see but truly “sees” Jesus
- Zaccheus can see physically but needs spiritual sight
Together they answer: Who really sees clearly?
Two Different People—Same Grace
- One is poor and needy
- One is rich and corrupt
Both are lost—and both are found
Bailey makes a big deal as you have seen over and over in his book about the step or inverse parallelism, the chiastic layout that he says is very Jewish and he even goes as far as to say that Luke was influenced by a Jewish believer in Jesus to think in this chiastic structure. That was fascinating to me, and I am not yet sure about that conclusion, but this did get me thinking about a contrast chart about these two men. Let me show you what I have written
There are 8 themes I see in these two stories, and they are neat in how they fit together.
Theme | Blind Man | Zaccheus |
Need | Physical blindness | Spiritual/moral blindness |
Social Status | Outcast (poor beggar) | Outcast (rich sinner) |
Location | Outside the city | Inside the city |
Obstacle | Told to be quiet | Can’t see over crowd |
Approach to Jesus | Loud, desperate cry | Quiet, curious seeking |
Jesus’ Response | Stops and heals | Calls by name, invites relationship |
Outcome | Receives sight, follows | Repents, restores, receives salvation |
Crowd Reaction | Tries to silence | Grumbles at Jesus’ choice |
Friends, we have only looked at two of the dozens of episodes in the life and ministry of Yeshua found in the Gospels. We are ever learning and this study tonight seriously helped me to ponder again how God involves himself in our lives and what he wants to say both about himself and about us as a result.
Let me end tonight the lecture part of the evening by rehearsing both what I think the phrase means and also my five takeaways from our study. And I hope you will continue this week, even this entire season of Lent and Easter, in pondering what great things God has done for you and what he wants to communicate to you as a result.
Repeat: What Might the Phrase Mean?
“The Dramatic Actions of Jesus” to me indicates moments where Jesus teaches through bold, symbolic actions:
1) Reveals who Yeshua is (e.g. Messiah, Servant, Judge)
2) Confronts hypocrisy and empty religion
3) Visually communicates spiritual truth
4) Often echoes Older Testament prophetic symbolism
Five Summary Thoughts from tonight:
1) Jews, Gentiles, women, men, barbarian, slaves, Sythians, Malaysians, Singaporeans, free people, Americans, Aborigines, Labour, Tories, Liberals, those who watch that other TV network, EVERYONE is welcome to the table of the Lord. Everyone is invited. No one should be left out.
2) Anyone who prevents others will attract God’s judgment.
3) Whether you are crying in desperation or hiding in curiosity—He sees you, calls you, and saves you.
4) Real encounters with Jesus will produce visible change
5) Just because a blind man cannot see Jesus, that doesn’t prevent Messiah seeing the blind man. There is hope for each of us, no matter our conditions and circumstances. We are seen and known by the Almighty.
